Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup

The Week That Was: 2013-01-12 (January 12, 2013) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project

###################################################

Quote of the Week: We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert. –-J Robert Oppenheimer.

###################################################

Number of the Week: 9,500 in 2012. Ten year average: 106,000

###################################################

SAVE THE DATE: February 2 — 1:30 to 3:30 A SEPP / VA-SEEE presentation on National and Virginia Energy Issues. At the Conference Center, Norfolk International Airport, 2200 Norview Avenue Norfolk, VA. Details to Follow.

###################################################

THIS WEEK:

British MET Office: The MET Office has come under severe criticism for two sets of predictions, some of the criticism is justified and some is not. The MET office made very inaccurate predictions of precipitation and drought. The biggest fault with the MET office appears to be its overconfidence in its short term predictions. As repeated many times, regional models have shown little skill in predicting beyond 10 days.

Using Environment Canada predictions Tim Ball illustrates this general failure. As he states, the issue is not the lack of computational power. “The real problems are inadequate data, lack of understanding of most major mechanisms, incorrect assumptions, and a determination to prove, instead of falsify, the AGW hypothesis.” The AGW hypothesis is that man’s emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), particularly carbon dioxide (CO2), are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming.

The second, and major, set of criticisms pertained to an adjustment in MET’s 2011 mid-term global temperature forecasts. During 2012, the MET has modified its global climate model to reflect more current temperatures and, apparently, incorporate changes in ocean currents and other natural causes of global warming / climate change. These changes lead to a forecast that there would be no warming trend to 2017 – something quite different than the previous forecast. The MET is to be congratulated in its efforts to break from the dogma of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its acolytes, who insist that GHG control climate, except for a slight variation in sunlight. It is doubtful if the now almost non-existent predictive ability of the climate models can be improved without breaking from the IPCC dogma.

Unfortunately, the MET made the change without any announcement, on Christmas Eve. The change was picked-up the blogger, Tallbloke, who recognized its significance (Amusingly, Tallbloke was identified by the police as a person of interest in the investigation of the Climategate leaks.) If the new MET forecast proves correct and, since there has been no surface warming trend in the data compiled by the MET Hadley Center and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), this would mean no warming trend for two decades, contradicting all predictions of a dire future of runaway warming.

Prediction in the chaotic non-linear climate system is extremely difficult, and failure is to be expected, and admired with corrected. The independence of the MET in adjusting its model should be welcomed by all. Please see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and Models v. Observations.

*******************

The Sun: A second note of encouragement this week came with the publication of the papers produced during a NASA conference on solar variability and the earth’s climate. The papers suggested that even small variation in luminosity of the sun (0.1%) can have a significant influence on the earth’s climate. For example, ultraviolet radiation can vary by factors of 10 or more which can have a large effect on the chemistry and thermal structure of the upper atmosphere, and, in turn, on the earth’s climate.

Unfortunately, the publication contained what is now an almost mandatory disclaimer in government climate science: “no satellite measurements have indicated that solar output and variability have contributed in a significant way to the increase in global mean temperature in the past 50 years.” As support for the statement the report cites the work of lead authors of the IPCC Summary for Policymakers and “American’s Climate Choices” by the National Research Council. The latter report has little scientific rigor.

However, recognition that the sun’s contribution to the earth’s climate is complex, varied, and not well understood goes far beyond typical IPCC dogma. Please see links under Science: Is the Sun Rising?

*******************

The Race to the Bottom: In the run-up to the Doha conference, which, thankfully, failed; a number of organizations, considered scientific, made ever more outlandish predictions of future temperatures if humans keep emitting CO2. Half jokingly, TWTW suggested that there may be a race among these organizations, which would be the most outlandish. If there was, the World Bank was probably the winner with a prediction of a warming as much as 4 deg C (7.2 deg F). Recently World Bank President Jim Yong Kim announced that he was so taken by prediction that he wishes the Bank to participate in a master plan to avoid temperature increases and sea level rise. Please see link under Expanding the Orthodoxy.

This week there seems to be a new race afoot. Which scientific organization is willing to rid itself of the burdens of scientific rigor and / or integrity the fastest? Several of the participants and their qualifications are listed below.

*******************

NOAA’s State of the Climate (SOTC): As discussed in last week’s TWTW, John Christy reported that for the US, except Hawaii, 2012 was the hottest in the 34 year old satellite record and the 9th warmest year globally. In its report, NOAA’ National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) announced that for the US, 2012 was the hottest ever and the second worse for extreme weather events. NOAA claims the records go back to 1895.

NOAA’s announcement was immediately picked up by the global warming chorus, demanding the government take greater control over the climate, namely reduce CO2 emissions. The mechanism by which atmospheric CO2 controls the severe cold occurring in Eurasia is not clear.

There are several major issues with the NOAA report, which are discussed in the links below and few mentioned here. NOAA made no effort to bring out that the US temperatures are inconsistent with global temperatures. Globally, 2012 is far from the hottest ever. Further, NOAA made no mention that, globally, severe weather events were down significantly.

Further, NOAA has demonstrated that there are significant issues with its temperature record, with manipulation of historic data, changing instruments sites, and poor siting of instruments that make them subject to small changes in the surroundings. One of the biggest issues is the severity of the heat and drought in the 1930s. Earlier, NOAA announced July 2012 was the hottest July ever, only to quietly back down as it became evident that July 1938 was hotter. We can expect that NOAA’s announcement will be modified in the near future, but without major press releases – the damage to science and credibility already complete. Please see links under Defending the Orthodoxy and Questioning the Orthodoxy.

*******************

Science Magazine: At the end of an essay on scientific breakthroughs in 2012, Editor-in-Chief Bruce Alberts states a parallel between public acceptance that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer and CO2 cause global warming. Alberts fails to acknowledge that the link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer was established by rigorous statistical analysis with adherence to strict principles as articulated by Sir Bradford Hill. There has been no rigorous statistical relationship established between CO2 emissions and global warming, particularly if all of the current warm period, the Holocene, is considered. Further, there has been no global warming of the atmosphere for at least a decade and no surface warming for 16 years as reported in HadCRU data. Failure to note these salient facts demonstrates the bias of the author. Please see link under Defending the Orthodoxy and for a brief statement of some of the strict principles, as articulated by John Brignell http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/big_liars.htm

*******************

IPCC AR5 – Working Group II: The IPCC has announced it displeasure with the leak of the draft of the AR5 report by Working Group II, which “assesses the scientific, technical, environmental, economic and social aspects of the vulnerability (sensitivity and adaptability) to climate change of, and the negative and positive consequences for, ecological systems, socio-economic sectors and human health, with an emphasis on regional sectoral and cross-sectoral issues.” http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/. It should. The leak reveals the usual gang of environmental suspects from WWF, Greenpeace, etc. The leak appeared on Donna Laframboise’s web site. Please see links under IPCC Leak.

*******************

MIT Technology Review: The editors of the review sent President Obama a letter with statements such as: “It’s time to acknowledge that green jobs were always just political cover for that motive. You must say unambiguously that the real reason to transform our energy system is to avoid the most catastrophic effects of global warming.” Obviously, these editors may know more about technology than the physics of global warming.

*******************

Draft U.S. Climate Assessment Report: This report, released on Friday, predicts a rise in temperatures of up to 10 deg F (5.6 C) by the end of the century. A quick glance suggests it may have all of the rigor of a report, done under Al Gore while he was Vice President, by a predecessor organization to the U.S. Global Change Research Program. That report was the first which the courts ruled did not meet the requirements of the US Data Quality Act also called Information Quality Act. Please see links under Defending the Orthodoxy.

*******************

American Geophysical Union (AGU): It pains members of SEPP to add the once distinguished AGU to this list. But the new leadership of that organization has made Michael Mann a Fellow and invited the likes of John Cook, Peter Gleick, Stephan Lewandowsky, and Naomi Oreskes to speak at its convention. No doubt the new leadership of the AGU will NOT invite long time AGU Fellow Fred Singer to rebut the false claims Oreskes made attacking the integrity of four distinguished scientists, three of whom are deceased. Please see links under Defending the Orthodoxy.

*******************

Al Gore: Mr. Gore does not come under the list. But the sale of the television channel in which he is an investor and promoter to a news group backed by the oil rich nation of Qatar demonstrates the cynicism and opportunism of many promoters of global warming / climate change and alternative energy. Please see links under Other News that May Be of Interest.

*******************

Corrections and Amplifications: Last week TWTW promised the specific comments on IPCC AR5 from five-time expert reviewer Vincent Gray. They will appear next week. Instead, his history with the IPCC can be found under Challenging the Orthodoxy.

Bulldog Christopher Horner, who finally got the EPA to begin releasing emails under secret accounts, said the correct number is 12,000 emails, not 7100 as TWTW reported. And this is only the beginning.

Reader Anton Garrett requested a reference for the effectiveness of indoor spraying DDT in controlling malaria in tropical nations. A web search produced no concise history, but a 2000 report of the dilemma that banning DDT causes can be found: “Balancing risks on the backs of the poor,” by Attaran, et al, Nature Medicine, Jul 2000, http://www.malaria.org/attarannaturemed.html

*******************

Number of the Week: 9,500 in 2012, ten year average: 106,000. These are the number of deaths world-wide from natural catastrophes as reported by the largest re-insurer of insurance companies, Munich Re. “Some 67% of overall losses and 90% of insured losses were attributable to the USA – the respective averages are 32% and 57%.” 2012 was an extraordinary year for the US, not a typical year or a trend. Sandy was the biggest loss because it hit one of the most vulnerable points in the US. The global warming chorus has no basis for using US weather events as proof that government control of GHG, particularly CO2, is needed. Please see link under Changing Weather.

###################################################

ARTICLES:

For the numbered articles below please see this week’s TWTW at: http://www.sepp.org. The articles are at the end of the pdf.

“This implies that recent global warming is not statistically significantly related to anthropogenic forcing. On the other hand, we find that greenhouse gas forcing might have had a temporary effect on global temperature.”

Link to the Report “Federal Advisory Committee Draft Climate Assessment Report Released for Public Review” by National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/

[SEPP Comment: Of the five distinct cold periods since the beginning of the Holocene, the last one, the Little Ice Age was the coldest. The warm periods that followed the earlier four cold periods were not caused by atmospheric carbon dioxide.]

[SEPP Comment: $90 Billion in government spending led to $100 Billion in private capital. The calculation is for job-years – one job lasting one year. The largest category is renewable generation (192,900), the second is energy efficiency – installing insulation (179,000) and the third largest is transit (158,200). How many of the jobs continue after the subsidies stop.]

EPA and other Regulators on the March

The EPA Pushes the Envelope, Again

A long train of abuses suggests an institutional culture that sees the law as an impediment.

9 thoughts on “Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup”

Just listened to the 6:00 news on the radio, you can really rely on the BBC! The evidence is mounting that AGW is the biggest con trick in history and they are banging on about China, Mexico and South Korea doing their bit to stop climate change by reducing CO2 emissions, they must live in a parallel universe. Other countries please note; organisations such as the BBC and Met Office that are publicly funded are usually not fit for purpose!

The UK met might be playing reverse psychology with it’s prediction of no warming for another five yrs, when they forecast no snow and it snowed then hot summer and it was cold and drought and it rained could they have worked out that the weather has always done the opposite to their predictions. Maybe they might just by luck get it right this time.

Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop and commented:
The untiring Ken Haapala compiles a superb review of the weeks climate related news – including a mention for the talkshop post on the MET Office global warming forecast change.

It must be clear by now even to the uninitiated that CO2 has no controlling influence on Earth’s climate.

I saw two interesting and very telling quotes yesterday by a warmist commentator on the MET debacle. The 1st was concerning the “heat generated by greenhouse gases” and the 2nd talked about “the MET’s ‘best guess'”. How incredibly stupid!! Any notion that a gas (read: CO2) can ‘generate heat’ is just mind bigglingly and manifestly false, and if all the MET can do with £200m/year is give us its ‘best guess’, then I think it’s time for it to go.

The fallacy of the greenhouse effect that ‘generates’ heat (by the sip posed back-radiation mechanism) is so easily falsified by a simple piece of Maths, why is it still going? The Maths is the net surface temp when summing the heat energy radiated (1) with the supposed back-radiated fraction (0.x). The answer is always -1 + 0.x and never +1 + 0.x, i.e. cooler, regardless of the CO2 level.

To think that hundreds of billions have been spent because of, and the likes of Mike Mann, Al Gore, Joun Houghton, etc. have been so comprehensively fooled by a simple Maths sign error is staggering.

The UK met might be playing reverse psychology with it’s prediction of no warming for another five yrs, when they forecast no snow and it snowed then hot summer and it was cold and drought and it rained could they have worked out that the weather has always done the opposite to their predictions. Maybe they might just by luck get it right this time.

They are getting worried because the UK weather has actually been cooling since 2003.

Re:
The Sun: A second note of encouragement this week came with the publication of the papers produced during a NASA conference on solar variability and the earth’s climate. The papers suggested that even small variation in luminosity of the sun (0.1%) can have a significant influence on the earth’s climate.>> For example, ultraviolet radiation can vary by factors of 10 or more <<which can have a large effect on the chemistry and thermal structure of the upper atmosphere, and, in turn, on the earth’s climate.

What has been the effect of IV variability on the past hysteria about the "Ozone Hole"?
-Toby

Instead, Baquet said the change was prompted by the shifting interdisciplinary landscape of news reporting. When the desk was created in early 2009, the environmental beat was largely seen as “singular and isolated,” he said. It was pre-fracking and pre-economic collapse. But today, environmental stories are “partly business, economic, national or local, among other subjects,” Baquet said. “They are more complex. We need to have people working on the different desks that can cover different parts of the story.”